Unrestrained Profit Seeking and Immortality - Essay Example

Outline The moral principles that should apply in any business include distributive justice, the rights of individuals, the virtue ethics, and utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a principle that takes care of the proper cause of action as the one that ensures maximum "happiness" to all, where the moral value of an act judged by its consequences. A right is a principle that protects the society while giving it the highest priority and thus a larger population endorses them. Distributive justice applies in the allocation of available goods in a society. Ethics of care is an element that promotes relationships and dependence. A virtue encourages the maintenance of the world as well as meeting one’s needs and the need of others. Virtue ethics is a principle that encourages moral character. It encourages one to do to others, as he / she would wish it done unto (Cuillla 17). These moral principles, however, do not apply. People have turned unto unrestricted profit seeking and immorality, thus breaching the business ethics and moral principles. This discussed in the industrial food system, consumer culture (story of the stuff), and in global warming (an inconvenient truth) (Cuillla 117). Q1. Unrestrained profit seeking and immortality The industrial food system has turned out to be the county’s food supply. Fast foods have taken the central parts of the highly consumed foods. Fast foods have gone a step ahead to alter the way chicken raised and their living conditions breaching the rights of animals. The various forms in which corn processed into, the various products of eggs and other fast food s as hamburger all constitute fast foods. In fact, a child reported of dying from Escherichia coli after eating hamburger as 325,000 Americans hospitalized where 5000 from food-borne illness. The food currently produced directly or indirectly affects the personal or community health, the natural resources, the environmental quality, and natural and human-induced hazards (Cuillla 341). It goes further to affecting science and technology locally, nationally and globally. The unrestricted profit seeking and immortality have lead to the breach of all moral principles and virtues. The consumer culture in the story of stuff shows the process goods undergo extraction, production, distribution, consumption, and disposal. The issue of finding out where all stuff possessed comes from, and where it goes after disposal is one at question. Extraction associated with exhaustion of resources and depletion of necessary materials for the next generation. During production, toxic chemicals released into the environment thus contaminating the natural resources. In distribution, selling and buying involved where the workers not paid accordingly. Consumption comes in, and the goods bought barely finish six months before they disposed. They are either out of fashion, or some new technology invented, and of course, people want the latest technology. Disposing means filling adding into the garbage associated with environmental pollution once again. The whole process as discussed associated with the breaching of all moral principles and virtues. Global warming depicted in the story of an inconvenient truth. Global warming is an issue that solved by being a non-partisan, no ideological expositional of climate science and using the moral common sense. Some people say fossil fuels, deforestation, and negligence to be the cause of global warming while others say it is due to trade and urban heat islands due to population growth. Issues raised are either for the causes of global warming is one-sided, misleading, exaggerated, speculative, and others are even wrong. However, the issue remains to be a moral issue. Having discussed all cases, the case that formed the basis of the presentation is the case of consumer culture illustrated in the story of staff. It clearly describes how all processes of undergo extraction, production, distribution, consumption, and disposal breaches all moral principles and virtues. Q 2. Democracy vs. Republicans The debate involves the democrats and republicans. Being democratic associated with being liberal. Democrats believe in a larger federal government where the government ought to look at the good of all persons rather than the good of an individual (Cuillla 339). They believe that the government should improve the social welfare and implement tax regimes that favor the less privileged. In other words, the government has a role to ensure the population is ‘equal”. The government develops public properties as the roads, police and fire departments, public schools, and national forests. It also controls all the business by imposing tax regulations. The government ensures that values the country holds evolve over time, thus supporting controversial choices as gay marriage and pro choice. On the other hand, the republicans are conservatives. They believe that development lies in their own properties as the cars, houses, clothing and other possessions rather than the contribution of the government. They thus want less interference by the government in their daily activities as they strongly believe in property rights rather than well-fare rights. This results in the economy held by the wealthy as the poor suffer. The debate now comes in where; there are things that are partly private and partly public. Things like the water treatment facilities and sewers, which publically funded, yet the republicans too benefit. The roads, the security imposed by the government and the public airports are facilities the republicans too use in their daily activities. This brings in the conflict, as republicans do not want to participate in paying taxes. These taxes constitute the government revenues that help in constructing the public facilities. This debate of the democrats and the republicans shapes one’s civil conduct into adopting the democratic style. The selfish and possessiveness replaced by open-mindedness. One should consider the welfare of a less privileged person who in the society. The public facilities as the healthcare facilities become affordable to all because of the tax contribution. Democracy encourages transparency of the government activities, and officials enhanced by the support of democracy. The American dream achieved if and only if, democracy enforced in the American government. In the tea party movement, for example, a patriotic majority group formed. This group is a political action committee that works towards the electoral change, supporting patriotic policies. It is currently supporting the Democratic Senior Senator, Harry Reid against the conservative republican front-runner Sue Lowden. The patriotic majority group, (we the 99%) is one that is power-oriented, affecting political action by influencing campaigns of chosen politicians. They aim at politics that promote the American dream and the strengthening of national security. Their principal is the provision of a ‘common good” and “dynamic growth” of the United States. The patriotic majority group communalize in calling for the creation of a vibrant economy with sustainable jobs. In the discussion of the democrats and the republicans, its clearly seen being democratic enables one to adhere to the moral principles. Democracy encourages distributive justice by considering the less privileged. It enhances transparency thus the rights of individuals worked on. Democracy shapes one’s civil conduct thus enhancing the virtue ethics. Utilitarianism well taken care of in democracy since there is the proper cause of actions that ensures maximum "happiness" to all. In general, a democratic government is all the United States needs to fulfill its dreams. Q 3. Voicing values Majority of people would like to bring “honesty” at the workplace. However, it notes that there are challenges to encounter that tempt one to “lie.” These cases arise when the way one would wish to do things at the workplace conflict with the bosses, clients, or fellow workmates. Situations arise where one left in a dilemma (Cuillla 338). Taking any of the available choices bound to adverse consequences. In workplaces, such cases are extremely common; failure to adhere to the “crimes” would mean firing, and adverse cases may arise where your life could be at risk. The possibility and desirability to voice values at the workplace enable individuals to learn to reorganize, speak, clarify and act on their values upon arise of such conflicts. If one found in such a situation, he/she should look for a way to win the solution. One can change the one in concern’s mind through persuasion and logic. One can find a way to go over the bosses head (if he/she is the concerned) and build coalitions with like-minded employees. The best of it all is the decision to speak. With the many different ways to voice one’s values, choice of the most comfortable way in relation to the situation. It should be a way that best fits one’s personality and style of communication. One can purposely do something that speaks out, thus voicing the value in an effective manner. This made perfect through practicing, pre-scripting and coaching. In the case of George, for example, the best thing George should do is to stop helping John in any way in his illegal activities and confront him. He should try all ways possible to inject John’s brain with some moral ethics at the workplace. George should bring the real picture of the eventuality of John’s action, of which in this case, will be closure of the business. He should reveal to him how his actions are slowly leading to their lack of employment in the near future if the business ends up closing. This may not be logical in the first time, and may destroy the relationship between George and John. However, with strong voicing of values in George, he should not tolerate ill actions at his sight. If none of this can work, then George would better approach the general manager and reveal the whole issue. He will have saved the business and at the same time, voiced his values. He will have also practiced utilitarianism, a principle that takes care of the proper cause of action, where the moral value of an act judged by its consequences. One needs knowing that voicing virtues should not depict him /her saint or martyr. The process needs competence and skills in that it done without proper notice. One needs also to be wise enough to identify the needs, desires, and emotions of the concerned victims before taking action. It could be a test trap to determine one’s trust to the organization. One should use the best approach to confuse the concerned victim (Cuillla 340). One may opt to story tell or use metaphors depending on the knowledge of the “ill-minded” strength and weakness. If confrontation is what is best, provided one is comfortable with it, then one can go and raise the objectives through a line of careful questioning. This may not be the most suitable way, but if it solves the problem then well and good. It is better to employ it at this point since is one’s strength to voice values at a stressing moment. One need not underestimate the power and influence of the context. It is difficult to stand against the authority or the majority. However, the strength of speaking one’s voice to values should be the driver to taking action. Work cited Cuillla, Joanne B. Business Ethics Quarterly. 21.2, (2011): 335-343. Read More